+- FsPassengers Forums (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum)
+-- Forum: FsPassengers (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: FsPassengers General (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: [closed] FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! (/showthread.php?tid=2990)
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Flying Monkey - 16-02-2008
Hi Dan,
Great ideas, your new types of flights, humanitarian and illegal sound good to me!
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - crowebird - 16-02-2008
hearing all the new features gets me excited!
I don't fly much on the computer at all, and is simply becuase i have moved to fsx, and i have no fsp
can't wait Dan, you have done some amazing work!
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Ali310 - 16-02-2008
Quote:What you think ? debate is open ! morale or not, fun or not ? parental code or not ?
Vote now (later will be to late)
Erm yeah I agree with these features. No parental controls, yes to morale and stealth, yes it would be fun (and possibly exciting).
Another way of putting the 'contraband' situation would be that you are just the middleman, and you have no idea what's actually inside the
boxes, therefore you can only speculate - it's not up to your imagination that way. You won't ever know, and don't want to either. All you care
about is money and your 'black market' reputation.
Quote:Quote:An example could be: Newcastle [EGNT] -&gt London [EGLL] -&gt New York [KJFK]
Sorry no, I dont' see any benefit of that, have three or ten reports merged in one ? how to do that ? leg 1 one page, leg two another page,
mixing statistic ? speed, distance ? income ? what about payload, fuel ? impossible to code ! and I don't see any reason to have such
confuse and complicated stuff... .Newcastle->;London one report, London->;New York another report, what's the problem ?
Personally, I thought this was a good idea. But it's your decision - I don't want to start ANOTHER argument. it's just I personally feel there's
nothing immoral about this, and it's not breaking any rules. Think of real life connecting flights - here's an infamous example:
Quote:On Wednesday December 21, 1988, Clipper Maid of the Seas touched down at London's Heathrow International Airport at noon
from San Francisco. The aircraft was parked at stand K-14, Terminal 3, was guarded for two hours by Pan Am's security company, Alert
Security, but otherwise was not watched.
The first leg of Pan Am Flight 103's journey began as the Boeing 727 feeder flight, PA103A, from Frankfurt International Airport, West
Germany to London Heathrow. Forty-seven of the 89 passengers on PA103A transferred at Heathrow to the Boeing 747 flight PA103
which was scheduled to fly to JFK. A Boeing 727 would have been used for the final leg of the journey from JFK to Detroit.
sorry to bring up such a bad example. my mother worked for Pan Am when the incident occurred, and volunteered to go to Lockerbie to
assist in whichever way possible. therefore it was an easy example for me to think of, without having to use made up flight numbers etc.
Anyway, I personally think there should be an option for 'connecting' flights - where some passengers stay on, some get off and get
replaced with new ones, and the plane gets refuelled etc. This could be especially handy, as my VA have a few connecting flights (there's
one that goes from the UK, to malaga, to somewhere in portugal, then to somewhere else in spain, then back to london), as well as 'tour'
flights. I therefore believe there should be an option for these connecting flights. Maybe opinions could be gathered as to how they should
be set out. And a main reason would be the fact that it would add to your flight time (where if you're doing say a 1.5 hour flight, and you do
two of them, but they're connecting/return flights, then they could qualify as a 3 hour flight, and you could get the bonuses for that). As I
said, it's up to Dan and how everyone else feels. I just thought this would be a useful feature, as there's no 'feeder flight' option.
Quote:Quote:Delare wrote:
Btw Dan, what do you think about my ideas on the previous pages? Would be nice to get some feedback if it's possible to add any of
those features.
Yes I'll add stuff... medical ugency and some others...
yay
can't wait for those.Just to confirm, will ALL the features of FsPX be included in FsP2004 v2? Or will some be omitted? Or vice versa?
And sorry for such a long post - I tried to cut as much out as possible. Just I hadn't been on in roughly 24 hours, and a lot was discussed
in that time haha
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - flylondon - 17-02-2008
Wow! Looking good, Dan!
Can't wait to see all the features!
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Atlantic Airways - 17-02-2008
I don't know how this would work but how about SEEING other planes that you bought flying around?
If WE set the regularly routes maybe- egll-EKCH and EKCH-- UURS so the airplane(s) will fly this leg?
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - jeffreycor - 17-02-2008
That would require it to add AI aircraft, flight plans, etc. which I would think is far beyond the scope of FSP. Sounds like something that
would take major work with almost no noticable effects. You'd have to happen to be in close range to where that plane would fly at that
spacific time. Much simplier if you want to see more planes flying around turn up the AI traffic. :P
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - highlander - 17-02-2008
Atlantic - great idea, but it's too hard to implement.
Sure, it could be done - Dan's program could generate flightplans based on the airports you fly to and from most, and the aircraft in your fleet that
you use to do it - but then unless there was a way for you to specify AI Model counterparts and paint jobs for every one of your UI Model aircraft and
paint jobs, you'd be getting UI Models flying around.
And sure, it'd look pretty - but unless your PC is nuclear powered, you wouldn't like it much if you decide to fly POSKY, MelJet, or PMDG aircraft
around... those aircraft don't work well when used as AI!
I did it by hand. Downloaded AI aircraft models and paint kits, repainted the AI models like my UI models, made flightplans, and it just worked. And
looks kinda funky too.
Cheers
Graeme
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Paganiny - 17-02-2008
Hello Dan... more than an excellent programmer you are a gentlemen, giving your costumers all this rare feedback. much appreciated.
I'm sorry if this was discussed here before already. But i just remembered that one of the things that i most wanted to be changed in FSP was the
speed limit penalty... and i explain, i know it's not realistic to fly with over speed, but problem is when sundly we get strong upper winds the
speed increases drastically, of course we need to decrease the thruster levels and that's what a real pilot does. the difference is a real pilot
doest´t gets a penalty for that. I would suggest FSPX to give something like 10 sec after getting the over speed before we get the penalty, a fair
time to correct the situation. even if ther's a decrease percentage on the happy passengers, fear or something.
I'm speaking about this because i got flights of 5+ hours ruined at the end due this.
thank you for FSP!
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Atlantic Airways - 17-02-2008
i know!
But Great Dan! Im so excited to it's release!
I can literely feel my credit card hungering for it :P
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - Urthgental - 18-02-2008
Hi Dan,
still on track with the new flight types?
"Risk Factor" for contreband could be related to the controlled airspace (e.g. class A high risk, class E low risk). And it could it make sense to take weather conditions & daytime into account for the result calculation.
E.g contreband flights might be harder to detect during night. Humanitary flights under bad weather conditions could be rewarded.
However, not sure, but there might be a generic problem with these flight types: They make only sense for very special routes.
It is exciting if you create a route from columbia to mexico and fly low in the dark without lights. But if you select contreband flight and just start at JFK, your might be caught immediately and all money is gone. Do you see a problem here? Maybe this is all too complex...
Regards,
Heiko
Post Edited ( 02-18-08 14:28 )
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - jeffreycor - 18-02-2008
Nice idea's Heiko, it makes perfect sense that night flying for contreband would reduce the risk.
and bad weather could be thought of as something like beinging in relief supplies to a storm battered community.
I see that takeoff location problem. Maybe the takeoff location could be ignored simulating the athroities not getting wind of your illicit flight
until after you're already in the air
FsP new idea - markab - 18-02-2008
Sorry about the double post. I meant to post this here initially.
Hi Dan,
I'm new to FsP but I thought I'd make a suggestion for a new feature. How about co-pilot geography announcements. Some
thing like "Ladies and gentleman we have now left Canadian airspace and have entered into the United States by the city of Bufallo, New
York" or maybe something like " Ladies and gentlemen if you look out the right side of the aircraft now you can see the the wonderful
lights of Las Vegas Nevada" Something like this would help keep us all entertained during long flights.
Regards,
Mark
Re: FsP new idea - Atlantic Airways - 18-02-2008
Great one Markab!
But it would be to hard to implement! Then Dan (or who is doing the voicepacks!)
that would maybe require 100(0) records for each city!
Re: FsPassengers for FSX official note and please ! - ameval - 18-02-2008
Everything keeps sounding awesome Dan good job in everything
FsP idea follow up - markab - 18-02-2008
Quote:Atlantic Airways wrote:
Great one Markab!
But it would be to hard to implement! Then Dan (or who is doing the voicepacks!)
that would maybe require 100(0) records for each city!
Thanks AA,
Actually I was thinking that Dan could utilize the MS text to speech engine already built into the operating system. The original
voices sound rather robotic however many of the after market voices from suppliers such as AT&T sound very realistic and it would
eliminate the need to make any recordings.
Regards,
Mark